All I can say is my projected costs end up being correct and the lowball fake numbers pushed by city council and the mayor were wrong.

Now, can we just admit the tunnel is a no-go and if city council shoves a $3 billion (eventually $8 billion when all is said and done) tax down Seattle's throats, there's going to be a lot of unelected council members and a mayor?

The cost of all construction has risen sharply over the past six months. It's basic supply-and-demand economics. There is so much construction going on right now that contractors are overworked and they won't take on new work unless they are extremely well paid for it. Prices for private work have gone up 20% to 30% over the past four months. The increase has caught everyone off guard. This is not a case of government agencies lowballing costs. It's a real problem.

Will -- There isn't enough state money for the rebuild either.

The really fascinating thing you're hearing now from City Council is that a number of pro-tunnel members have spoken favorably of the PWC option, or some variation thereof. It's the pro-rebuild councilmembers, Licata and Della, who have cemented their positions. The fundamental reason the pro-tunnel councilmembers have been more open-minded is simple: the PWC option makes a commitment to opening the waterfront.

Josh, you refer to "the retrofit option being pushed by council president Nick Licata." I thought Licata had dismissed that idea based on the engineers' input.

Any of you folks ever heard of a place called New Orleans? That's what's going to have to happen here. Until disaster strikes, there will be no 520, no viaduct replacement, no light rail expansion, no nothing. We'll probably end up paying for it, but we won't actually get any of it.

Josh Feit writes: Indeed, it’s hard not to believe that the daunting new viaduct numbers from the state were a targeted, well-timed political hit from Gregoire, who wants to nudge Nickels and Seattle toward choosing the cheapest option.

With the timing of that announcement, I couldn't help but think the same thing. And this makes me very nervous about Gregoire's motives.

Really, it all comes down to what kind of a political animal Christine Gregoire is:

• Is she a dealmaker who tries to bring opposing sides to the table to make tough compromises and get things done? That is, her political instincts are focused on the stuff of her job.
• Or is she a strategist who realizes that she can establish herself as Ms. Fiscal Responsibility and the champion of "the rest of Washington" by sticking it to the big, bad, liberal bogeyman, Seattle? That is, her political instincts are focused on keeping her job.

I must say the latter strategy is quite shrewd. You cut off your opponents by currying favor with the very electorate that leans toward them, realizing full well that you're at no risk of rebellion by your base. For one thing, your base is too weak and divided; besides, the political system is jiggered to quell rebellions from the base.

In the short term, it's the kind of strategy that almost always works for Democrats in blue-leaning states. It's working now for Maria "Right to Cheap Gas" Cantwell, and how often does a Ned Lamont defeat a Joe Lieberman anyway? In the long term, it's the kind of strategy that defeats Democrats, not only because they come across as Republicans Lite but because the best way to create more Democratic voters is to promote density. As The Stranger has noted so persuasively, city-dwellers overwhelmingly vote Democratic.

Forget the viaduct.

If I could just get the city's traffic engineers to do their job right and better synchronize the lights through town, I'd be happy.

I hate, for example, almost always having to stop for the light just changing red (unless I speed) at Pike after turning right off Madison westbound, or at 23rd and Union after getting the light at 14th and Union - or at just about every light westbound on Denny toward Seattle Center.

No wonder people think they can't live without the darn thing - it's the only place in town there's often clear sailing.

Ah, Seattle. The rural metropolis that never met an issue or problem it couldn't further discuss.

We came so very close to a meaningful mass transit system with the Forward Thrust Mega-Bond issue in '68. Today, we'd have a BART-like rail line running from Everett to Tacoma and points eastside. It failed. Talk, talk; dicker, dicker.

D in Democrat stands for Discuss and Dither.

Hey, City Comforts, ok if I build a nuclear power reactor next door to your house? Otherwise, you'll have to compensate me for "takings" of my "future property rights".

I figure a few million should keep me from building it. I'll be storing the radioactive waste on your side of the lot. Hope it doesn't spill.

Putting a cap on condo conversion and building may free up these construction workers schedules and control the rate of inflation on their labor and materials, HINT HINT HINT.